The Merc engine is strong, and the soft/hard tyres should make a late charge possible.

My take: Schumi starting on softs, then going for hard/hard with a late charge. A fifth place might be the optimum he reaches, more realistically a seventh (like Spa - the characteristics of Suzuka are similar).

Anyway, after all that fall out in the last days it would be nice to have a few good race results. Although I wished that Michael could still score that elusive GP win (when he had done so many before, 91 wins, which sometimes seemed to fall into his lap), now even one GP seems to be too much for the asking.

I gather Suzuka and Interlagos are the best chances for good results for Michael, with Texas hard to guess - traditionally Michael did always very well in the USA.

F1 is so much duller without him, tbh the only reason I'll be watching in 2013 is to cheer LOUDLY when a Merc DNF's.
I have nothing against Nico or Lewis but the way the team have treated Michael is disgusting, I hope they never score another point after this season ends. Totally lost all respect for Ross.

F1 is so much duller without him, tbh the only reason I'll be watching in 2013 is to cheer LOUDLY when a Merc DNF's.I have nothing against Nico or Lewis but the way the team have treated Michael is disgusting, I hope they never score another point after this season ends. Totally lost all respect for Ross.

really? where have you genious took this numbers from? your imagination/guess?

In my view, Schumacher simply spanked Senna in most qualifyings of 92/93, considering the cars each had, and I'll never buy this Senna being faster drivel.

But have fun believing in that

What ? I'm big fan of Schumacher, but you talk BS there, sorry i don't want to be rude.

In 92, it's simple, the Benetton was FAR better than the Mclaren. In 93 it was worse, the Benetton have have a Ford Cosworth engine, but it was a customer engine... While Benetton have an official engine. These two years, the Benetton was a much better car than the Mclaren.

1992 was the start of the end for Mclaren, it's why Senna leave the team.

What ? I'm big fan of Schumacher, but you talk BS there, sorry i don't want to be rude.

In 92, it's simple, the Benetton was FAR better than the Mclaren. In 93 it was worse, the Benetton have have a Ford Cosworth engine, but it was a customer engine... While Benetton have an official engine. These two years, the Benetton was a much better car than the Mclaren.

1992 was the start of the end for Mclaren, it's why Senna leave the team.

loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooool

92:The Mac has about +80 horse power and electronix stuff like tc, active suspention, semi-auto gear-shift. They can get 5 wins (Senna 3, Berger 2 and a pole)The Benetton has much less horse power, no TC, no active suspention, no semi-auto gear-shift.

93:The different between the costumer Ford engine and the factory spec engine was marginal:

From Silvertone Mac use the same spec engine than the Benetton, but the first some races of the season Benetton still has no TC or active suspension, but Mac has might be the best car electronis stuffs of the grid (and they spend the most money that year)

Schumacher was on Britain's Next F1 Star tonight on Sky Sports F1 with teenager Seb Morris, worth a watch for those who haven't seen it as it is not often you see Schumacher outside of the media spotlight.

0.1s is not a lot of time/speed difference. Senna was 1.5s faster than Prost at Monaco, and 0.6s on average. I'm a Schumacher fan btw, just saying all this so that Senna fans can shut-up.

People usually like to state their guesses as facts.

What is the raw speed difference between Lewis and Jenson? Massa and Alonso? Webber and Vettel?

Even drivers are team mates for several seasons, it's difficult to say by how much one faster than the other. Webber was trashed in qualifying last year and this year he was having the upper hand untill a while ago. Sometimes Massa is over a second slower and others only half second. So which is the speed difference between them?

If we can barely guess the speed gap between long time team mates, how can one say driver A was x,xxxs faster than driver B at their respective primes, when they were never even team mates?

Besides, it seems to be you who needs to believe in stuff, rather than reyling on facts. Disregarding the fallacy of comparing drivers in different cars for a second, the qualifying record between AS and MS in 1993 is 8:8, so MS wasn't even in front 'in most qualifyings', which is sort of a prerequisite to declare "spanking", wouldn't you agree?

Anyway, if you must, feel free to keep believeing.

you are a Senna fan aren't you? It's not me who believes in everything. I only believe in facts. But 99% of Senna fans I have met are diehard believers of their little passions. Most of them are 100% sure AS was the greatest, fastest and etc driver that ever lived who will ever live.

It's ok, it's just another poor gospel. Most of the Senna's reputation is gospel but still the deludes like to think this is a proven fact.

Gilles Villeneuve is my favourite driver ever but I don't know who was really the fastest or best or more skilled as is the point on my previous post

edit: the spanking I refered to was not about the 8:8 but the gaps the Schumacher imposed to Senna in many of those qualifyings. Something that Senna could only do in the very first GP of that year IIRC.

What ? I'm big fan of Schumacher, but you talk BS there, sorry i don't want to be rude.

In 92, it's simple, the Benetton was FAR better than the Mclaren. In 93 it was worse, the Benetton have have a Ford Cosworth engine, but it was a customer engine... While Benetton have an official engine. These two years, the Benetton was a much better car than the Mclaren.

1992 was the start of the end for Mclaren, it's why Senna leave the team.

I don't thing you were rude, but maybe just completely fool in that. Now I'm the one not wanting to be rude.

I don't know what you meant by "better". Mclaren had poor reliability so in that sense, you could say Benetton was far better. Pace-wise though, it's even ridiculous to compare. Mp4-7 was waaaaaaaaaaaay faster than B192

As for 93, I think it's the 451556184982132498436216 th time I say this on the internet, but here we go again: From Silverstone onwards, the engines were the same.

When someone claims Benetton were much(saying they were faster at all is already something to be proven, nevermind the "much") better, I wonder if 2 decades in the future there will be people claiming that Caterham was faster than Toro Rosso and that Kova and Petrov were bad not to beat Ricciardo and Vergne

92:The Mac has about +80 horse power and electronix stuff like tc, active suspention, semi-auto gear-shift. They can get 5 wins (Senna 3, Berger 2 and a pole)The Benetton has much less horse power, no TC, no active suspention, no semi-auto gear-shift.

93:The different between the costumer Ford engine and the factory spec engine was marginal:

From Silvertone Mac use the same spec engine than the Benetton, but the first some races of the season Benetton still has no TC or active suspension, but Mac has might be the best car electronis stuffs of the grid (and they spend the most money that year)

Please please don't post the facts. Let's people keep on believing Benetton was a rocketship and Mclaren a dog. The same as HRT being a tremendous fast car and Red Bull being a very slow one

you are a Senna fan aren't you? It's not me who believes in everything. I only believe in facts. But 99% of Senna fans I have met are diehard believers of their little passions. Most of them are 100% sure AS was the greatest, fastest and etc driver that ever lived who will ever live.

It's ok, it's just another poor gospel. Most of the Senna's reputation is gospel but still the deludes like to think this is a proven fact.

Gilles Villeneuve is my favourite driver ever but I don't know who was really the fastest or best or more skilled as is the point on my previous post

It's your right to believe what you will, obviously. Not disputíng that right, nor do I care.

However, if you're such a firm believer in facts, you should try all the more to get them right.

edit: the spanking I refered to was not about the 8:8 but the gaps the Schumacher imposed to Senna in many of those qualifyings. Something that Senna could only do in the very first GP of that year IIRC.

You claimed

... Schumacher simply spanked Senna in most qualifyings of 92/93...

I only gave you the stats for 1993, but if you insist on being shown the whole magnitude of your wrongness, I'm happy to include 1992 where, low and behold, the qualifying record between Senna and Schumacher was 14:2 in favour of Senna.

So over the two-year period you claimed Senna being "spanked in most qualifyings" by Schumacher, Senna actually qualified better 22 times and only started behind MS 10 times.

Facts and gospel at work here indeed, but unfortunately precisely the other way round as you propagated.

I don't thing you were rude, but maybe just completely fool in that. Now I'm the one not wanting to be rude.

I don't know what you meant by "better". Mclaren had poor reliability so in that sense, you could say Benetton was far better. Pace-wise though, it's even ridiculous to compare. Mp4-7 was waaaaaaaaaaaay faster than B192

As for 93, I think it's the 451556184982132498436216 th time I say this on the internet, but here we go again: From Silverstone onwards, the engines were the same.

Also, in 1993, the Benetton didn't get a semi-auto box and traction control/active suspension until the Monaco Grand Prix.

People take some weirdly simplified view of the world, where cars are equal except for the engine (when it suits their myth) Case in point 1993. The Mclaren had a slightly worse engine for some of the year.. but the chassis was a work of art, one of the finest chassis ever to come out of the team. Ask anyone at the team, it was superb, and just perfect for Senna's style. Go see the car, it is beautiful even now. It may also be the most technologically advanced car of its era, beating even the Williams on that front. The Benetton chassis was in no way as good, not even after getting the active upgrades, but especially not before.

Senna was unmatched as a qualifier, I do believe that. Its not about tenths per lap it is about focus on one lap at the exclusion of everything else and he was the best ever at that. that is worth only a place or so on saturday however, and Michael had him over a weekend though, almost every time.

Senna also put in that fabulous performance at Donnington which (well earned) creates a myth that he drove like that all year.

I only gave you the stats for 1993, but if you insist on being shown the whole magnitude of your wrongness, I'm happy to include 1992 where, low and behold, the qualifying record between Senna and Schumacher was 14:2 in favour of Senna.

So over the two-year period you claimed Senna being "spanked in most qualifyings" by Schumacher, Senna actually qualified better 22 times and only started behind MS 10 times.

Facts and gospel at work here indeed, but unfortunately precisely the other way round as you propagated.

In 93 when both drove a V8 powered car it was 8-8. Other years senna has +4(91,92) or +2(94) cylinders.

another interesting fact:

98 Barcelona was the last race where AS can finish ahead of Michael (when both finish the race), but those Barcelona race was close also...

Senna also put in that fabulous performance at Donnington which (well earned) creates a myth that he drove like that all year.

That wasn't bad, but imho Prost lead that race in half distance, and then force to spend about one minute in the pit in one of his pit stops...

I am by no means a religious person, but I have to believe that if there are higher forces in control of our lives, then in all fairness, Schumacher will get his last hurray. After all the trouble the trouble he's had to go through these past three years, no one could be more worthy of it.
Just let it drizzle a little in Japan... or whatever. Anything to give the man a chance. I wouldn't even be less ecstatic about it even it turned out to be a complete fluke victory. Schumacher's had enough bad luck to have good luck for once.

92:The Mac has about +80 horse power and electronix stuff like tc, active suspention, semi-auto gear-shift. They can get 5 wins (Senna 3, Berger 2 and a pole)The Benetton has much less horse power, no TC, no active suspention, no semi-auto gear-shift.

Not even a thousand "o" in your lol can mask the mistakes in your post.

I wouldn't rely totally on any of the HP numbers claimed in publications, but for what it's worth, Autocourse has the diffeence between Hondas RA122 and Bennetons Ford HB as... wait for it... 10 HP. That's right, ten. 740 vs. 730. Abit less than 80, hm? Not to speak of the fact that the Ford needed about 15 percent less fuel than the Honda over race distance.

The other thing, McLaren did NOT have active suspension in 1992. They tested it briefly and for the first time Friday in Monza, but never raced it.

People take some weirdly simplified view of the world, where cars are equal except for the engine (when it suits their myth) Case in point 1993. The Mclaren had a slightly worse engine for some of the year.. but the chassis was a work of art, one of the finest chassis ever to come out of the team. Ask anyone at the team, it was superb, and just perfect for Senna's style. Go see the car, it is beautiful even now. It may also be the most technologically advanced car of its era, beating even the Williams on that front.

I agree it was an excellent chassis and a beautiful car. They did, however, have their fair share of teething troubles with the active suspension and other electronic gimmicks on the car. And they had an allmighty mid-season slump in performance, only recovering with upgrades by Monza.

The Benetton chassis was in no way as good, not even after getting the active upgrades, but especially not before.

That's an exaggeration. IMO it was nip and tuck in performance between McLaren and Benetton all year.

Senna was unmatched as a qualifier, I do believe that. Its not about tenths per lap it is about focus on one lap at the exclusion of everything else and he was the best ever at that. that is worth only a place or so on saturday however, and Michael had him over a weekend though, almost every time.

That's even more of an exaggeration. 'Almost every time', during '92 and '93?

Senna also put in that fabulous performance at Donnington which (well earned) creates a myth that he drove like that all year.

That wasn't bad, but imho Prost lead that race in half distance, and then force to spend about one minute in the pit in one of his pit stops...

Prost only led by half distance again because Senna had been delayed in the pits on his stop (sticky wheel nut). Then on another stop, Prost stalled the car, so his fault. Later he had a slow puncture, but by that time the race was lost already anyway. Overall, Prost made 2 stops more than Senna, his own choice.

Here's Frank Williams words on the matter:

"Alain made a very clever change onto dry tyres, but threw it away with a vastly premature change back to wets and that was the end of the race. ... All tyre changes were initiated and motivated by the driver. Any suggestion that anybody else made those decisions is untrue."

I only gave you the stats for 1993, but if you insist on being shown the whole magnitude of your wrongness, I'm happy to include 1992 where, low and behold, the qualifying record between Senna and Schumacher was 14:2 in favour of Senna.

So over the two-year period you claimed Senna being "spanked in most qualifyings" by Schumacher, Senna actually qualified better 22 times and only started behind MS 10 times.

Facts and gospel at work here indeed, but unfortunately precisely the other way round as you propagated.

The fact that Schumacher managed to beat Senna even if in only 2 qualifyings in 92 is already enough of a spanking. If PDLR manages to genuinely outpace Caterhams and Toro Rossos it's already the best qualifying performance ever from a driver. Still, even with that, he would be beaten by everybody in Q2 but the 16/17th would be a spanking in everybody else.

Obviously I used this as an exaggerated example, though. No driver can do that with such HRT

Not even a thousand "o" in your lol can mask the mistakes in your post.

I wouldn't rely totally on any of the HP numbers claimed in publications, but for what it's worth, Autocourse has the diffeence between Hondas RA122 and Bennetons Ford HB as... wait for it... 10 HP. That's right, ten. 740 vs. 730. Abit less than 80, hm? Not to speak of the fact that the Ford needed about 15 percent less fuel than the Honda over race distance.

The other thing, McLaren did NOT have active suspension in 1992. They tested it briefly and for the first time Friday in Monza, but never raced it.

the number of "o" he used serves to point out the naivety of people.

But I won't waste my time anymore debating with you after this utter pathetic post. You have 0 knowledge of mechanics.

In all seriousness, it takes A LOT of stupidity or complete lack of knowledge to state such things.

The "publications" have VERY reliable numbers because it's possible to know, from various ways, the power of engines with a quite good precision. Further more, it's ridiculously obvious to anyone with a IQ of 5 and a little bit of knowledge in mechanics that a V12 engine(Mclaren's Honda) will give A LOT more power than a V8(Benetton's Ford) under that same circunstances of rules and technology

But congratulations, I could never thought anybody would believe on such things as "740 vs 730"

PS: I'm not sure of this but I think I already read serious publications that Mclaren tested and USED during GPs active suspension in late 92. But I'm really unsure on this one

Come on, bring more stupid numbers from "autocourse"(what is that, Senna fanboy's publication with 0 mechanics knowledge) or you just made that up?

People take some weirdly simplified view of the world, where cars are equal except for the engine (when it suits their myth) Case in point 1993. The Mclaren had a slightly worse engine for some of the year.. but the chassis was a work of art, one of the finest chassis ever to come out of the team. Ask anyone at the team, it was superb, and just perfect for Senna's style. Go see the car, it is beautiful even now. It may also be the most technologically advanced car of its era, beating even the Williams on that front. The Benetton chassis was in no way as good, not even after getting the active upgrades, but especially not before.

Senna was unmatched as a qualifier, I do believe that. Its not about tenths per lap it is about focus on one lap at the exclusion of everything else and he was the best ever at that. that is worth only a place or so on saturday however, and Michael had him over a weekend though, almost every time.

Senna also put in that fabulous performance at Donnington which (well earned) creates a myth that he drove like that all year.

If you take the whole '93 season you will see that while Donington was really a standout performance, Senna was driving exceptionally well thw whole season, only to let down by unreliability problems all year. The only mistake he made was at monza maybe.And the last two races were at least as great like Donington.

Kaltenborn confirmed in the FIA press conference that they had not offered Schumacher a contract for 2013.

So what were his "options" then ?

Perhaps Kaltenborn says Sauber did not offer a contract, but was there a denial of any interest in him at all ? I think MS did not explore the opportunity further which is why the talks never reached a stage where he could talk about a contract. But that is just me speculating.

Perhaps Kaltenborn says Sauber did not offer a contract, but was there a denial of any interest in him at all ? I think MS did not explore the opportunity further which is why the talks never reached a stage where he could talk about a contract. But that is just me speculating.

"But while Schumacher was keen to carry on, it wasn't at the expense of his dignity. Scrambling around to piece together a commercially-driven deal to drive for, say, Williams or Sauber would have smacked of desperation."

Of course he had options. He's still better than half the grid but above all, a massive marketing asset. But like the author above, I say good on him that he didn't explore those possibilities at the expense of his dignity.

92:The Mac has about +80 horse power and electronix stuff like tc, active suspention, semi-auto gear-shift. They can get 5 wins (Senna 3, Berger 2 and a pole)The Benetton has much less horse power, no TC, no active suspention, no semi-auto gear-shift.

93:The different between the costumer Ford engine and the factory spec engine was marginal:

From Silvertone Mac use the same spec engine than the Benetton, but the first some races of the season Benetton still has no TC or active suspension, but Mac has might be the best car electronis stuffs of the grid (and they spend the most money that year)

From what I've hear the change in engine specification you mention at Silvertone 1993 was a trade, Ford would give McLaren the lastest specification engine if McLaren would allow Benetton to use their traction control system. So from then onwards the engines in the Benetton and the McLaren should have been similar.

Crashed in free practice 2 - clearly Michael does not know anymore where his limits are. He is driving this season in the way of Maldonado, Grosjean, di Resta (rare exception today), but they are youngsters - MSC is supposedly one of the best drivers in history.

I am amazed how many sentimental posts I have been reading in the last days here on the BB - people stating that in 2013 F1 does not interest them anymore, as Michael will not be driving anymore. While it is time for Michael to leave before some harm happens (to him or to others), the most fascinating point is that here we have an blatant example of idolatry, hero worship if you will.

The sport has always been greater than any of its drivers - F1 has survived the demise of Clark and Senna for example - and it can well do without Schumacher. So whoever will be not following the sport anymore is obviously more interested in one person than in the sport. Fascinating.

Crashed in free practice 2 - clearly Michael does not know anymore where his limits are. He is driving this season in the way of Maldonado, Grosjean, di Resta (rare exception today), but they are youngsters - MSC is supposedly one of the best drivers in history.

I am amazed how many sentimental posts I have been reading in the last days here on the BB - people stating that in 2013 F1 does not interest them anymore, as Michael will not be driving anymore. While it is time for Michael to leave before some harm happens (to him or to others), the most fascinating point is that here we have an blatant example of idolatry, hero worship if you will.

The sport has always been greater than any of its drivers - F1 has survived the demise of Clark and Senna for example - and it can well do without Schumacher. So whoever will be not following the sport anymore is obviously more interested in one person than in the sport. Fascinating.

Crashed in free practice 2 - clearly Michael does not know anymore where his limits are. He is driving this season in the way of Maldonado, Grosjean, di Resta (rare exception today), but they are youngsters - MSC is supposedly one of the best drivers in history.

I am amazed how many sentimental posts I have been reading in the last days here on the BB - people stating that in 2013 F1 does not interest them anymore, as Michael will not be driving anymore. While it is time for Michael to leave before some harm happens (to him or to others), the most fascinating point is that here we have an blatant example of idolatry, hero worship if you will.

The sport has always been greater than any of its drivers - F1 has survived the demise of Clark and Senna for example - and it can well do without Schumacher. So whoever will be not following the sport anymore is obviously more interested in one person than in the sport. Fascinating.

Michael is a nine-year-old Canadian boy with a lively mind in a body severely crippled body by an incurable muscular disease. He can't walk and is confined to a wheelchair, nor can he speak properly, though his loving family understands him. Yet Michael's handicap is no barrier when it comes to accomodating his main passion in life: F1 racing in general and one driver in particular.

At home in Toronto Michael spends most of his time in a bedroom that is a shrine to his favourite driver. The wall facing the bed is dominated by a hand-painted mural of a life-size car driven by Michael's hero, whose image is also depicted all around the room in photos, posters, banners and other regalia. His parents and younger brother decorated the room for him, but his father, a construction worker, said Michael was the foreman on the job. On Grand Prix Sundays, long before the race begins on television, the family dresses Michael in a sweater and cap in the colours of the driver who means the world to him.

Michael's mother, who works as a secretary, arranges family life around her son's special needs and also tries to brighten his life with special occasions. On one occasion, after saving up for some time, the family was able to afford a journey to the Canadian Grand Prix in Montreal, where the goal was for Michael to meet his hero. Each day, in the morning and evening, they stood patiently outside the entrance to the paddock, with Michael fairly bouncing in his wheelchair, thrilled at the prospect of a meeting that unfortunately did not take place. Though other drivers came and went, the one they were waiting for never appeared and the family went home disappointed.

But his mother, determined to make Michael's dream come true, persevered. She found out his hero used another entrance to the paddock in Montreal. She was also told that famous F1 drivers are besieged with so many requests and their time is so limited that no matter how worthwhile the cause might be, their ability to make individual dreams come true is very limited. Nevertheless, Michael's mother remained convinced that her son was a special case, and that his hero would recognize this when he saw him. And so the family returned to Montreal again, and early on the morning of opening day they were waiting outside the paddock. But so was a jostling, boisterous crowd of celebrity seekers and autograph hunters, few of whom paid any attention to the small family group - the anxious mother and father and two young boys, one of them sitting twisted and contorted in a wheelchair.

Suddenly, the crowd became noisier and someone shouted that a famous driver was arriving on the back of a scooter. The driver jumped off and ran for the paddock turnstiles, followed by his flustered personal assistant who said he was late for a meeting with his engineers and had no time to stop. But he did stop, this famous driver, and he pushed his way through the now silent crowd of on-lookers and went directly to the family with the little boy in the wheelchair.

Michael's parents stood speechless and immobilized, unable to come to grips with the fact that this famous driver had actually singled them out for his individual attention. The driver quickly took charge of the situation. He shook hands with both parents, asked them for a pen to sign his name on their boys' caps and told them to take photos. Then he got down on one knee and put his arm around little Michael in the wheelchair. He hugged him closer and whispered in his ear: "Hi, your Mom and Dad tell me we have the same name. Mine is Michael Schumacher and I am very happy to meet you."